the Codex Sinaiticus Project "English translation" deception

Steven Avery

Administrator

First, understand that neither Vaticanus or Sinaiticus actually has an English translation, not even for one book. (There is a separate discussion of this on the textual forums.) For Sinaiticus, in particular, the continual blunders make such a text impossible. It would be unreadable, errant English, sentence after sentence.

This whole sad story of deceiving the public into thinking that they are reading the Sinaiticus NT has an interesting history.


Henry Tompkins Anderson (1812-1872)
http://www.therestorationmovement.com/_states/dc/anderson.htm

The New Testament translated from the Original Greek (1866)
Henry Tompkins Anderson
https://books.google.com/books?id=GMwdkozJpj0C

None of this was Sinaiticus, it was a hybrid text. As an example, you have "God was manifest in the flesh", yet Acts 8:37 is omitted.

We have to fast forward to 1918.

Henry T. Anderson, The New Testament Translated from the Sinaitic Manuscript discovered by Constantine Tischendorf at Mount Sinai. Cincinnati: The Standard Publishing Company, 1918. This purports to be an English version of Codex Sinaiticus, but in fact it is a revision of Anderson’s earlier translation of the New Testament, with alterations according to some of the readings of Codex Sinaiticus. The preface gives no information about what sources Anderson used. It is said that the version was prepared by Anderson shortly before his death in 1872.
http://www.bible-researcher.com/anderson1.html

This purports to be an English version of Codex Sinaiticus, but in fact it is a revision of Anderson's earlier translation of the New Testament, with alterations according to some of the readings of Codex Sinaiticus.- Michael Marlowe, bible-researcher
So here we have another hybrid edition, published in 1918, involving his daughter and son-in-law. While this has many Sinaiticus readings, it starts with a base text closer to the AV and remains very much a hybrid.

The New Testament : translated from the Sinaitic manuscript discovered by Constantine Tischendorf at Mt. Sinai (1918)
Preface by Pickett Anderson Timmins
https://archive.org/details/newtestamenttran00ande
https://books.google.com/books?id=DpK3vsjxVTUC

Henry T Anderson ... made his translation without reference to any version ; that is, he adopted no version as a basis. His work was not a Revision of any former version, but a New Translation ... This translation was just finished when Teschendorf s great discovery was published to the world; and the author immediately began translating this newly found text, known as Codex Sinaiticus, so called because the manuscript was found near Mt. Sinai. .... From this great discovery is this translation made, and to all lovers of Truth is it dedicated.
This was definitely inaccurate, but nobody really cared, it was not received as an actual Sinaiticus translation and had minimal impact ... until the CSP.

The bogus nature of writing that this was a translation of the Sinaitic document was easily recognized. Here is one example from Albert Joseph Edmunds (1857-1941). (Edmunds was problematic himself, with attempts at Christian-Buddhist combinations, however he could easily discern that this was not what it purported to be.

The Monist (1919)
https://books.google.com/books?id=gakLAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA480

By comparing this translation with the photograph of the Greek manuscript, the reader will discover two things:
1. Important matter omitted by the manuscript is added by the translator.
2. Important matter added by the manuscript is omitted by the translator.
... Under No. 2, the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas follow John's Revelation in the manuscript, without any note to indicate that they do not belong in the New Testament. This is just the kind of fact which the serious reader wants to know, but the translator withholds the knowledge.... The translator died many years ago and represented a now extinct school
of theological shuffling. The Standard Publishing Company of Cincinnati has done very wrong to perpetuate this sort of thing. In science, public opinion has always required literary men to speak the truth. In the twentieth century it expects religion to do the same.
Note that the whole issue of forcing in the "immerse" translation, instead of baptism was part of the original enterprise.

===================================================

Luther W. Martin (b. 1919) gave a list of readings in:

Unholy Hands on the Bible
: An Examination of Six Major New Versions -
Gnostic Influences on the Bible - Luther W. Martin
H. T. Anderson's Translation 1864 and 1866
https://books.google.com/books?id=6bQ6rfcdGywC&pg=PA444


And in 2004, Jackson Snyder reprinted the edition.


CODEX SINAITICUS: The New Testament translated from the Sinaitic Manuscript
Discovered by Constantine Tischendorf at Mt. Sinai by H. T. Anderson, begun in 1861
Copyright ?2004 Jackson H. Snyder II
Jackson H. Snyder II[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]http://jacksonsnyder.com/nt/pages/00pref.htm

English translations of the Sinaiticus are rare enough; Anderson’s New Testament is unique. ... H. T. Anderson ... near the close of his life he unfortunately gave utterance to some undigested metaphysical conclusions
This was innerlightism of Walter Scott Russell (1832-1863) with the following quote from Anderson, as documented by James L. McMillan.

‘Man has within him, from God, the power to cognize the true, the beautiful, and the good, and with the Messiah before him revealing these, he can know all that is knowable in the present state.’
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ekNBkmgn1Hpnm_bGTtw5R3_Qzpllh7UC3uWLPUanlHw/pubhtml
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
the CSP pretends that the Anderson volume is a Sinaiticus English translation


This history actually began back in 2007, when I was noticing that there were no English translations of Vaticanus or Sinaiticus available:

[KJBD] searching for English editions of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/kingjamesbibledefense/conversations/topics/2984

Time permitting, I will show more about this search.

==============================

The history of the CSP on this is rather sordid and unethical, as they have continued to perpetuate the deception upon the public. Some of the history is in my correspondence with their administration. And I put a brief review, with urls, in the Facebook forum in July, 2014, and will tweak that post here.

===============================


King James Bible Debate
https://www.facebook.com/groups/212...d=10152255935786693&offset=0&total_comments=4

As to the Henry Tompkins Anderson (1812-1872) English text:

The Codex Sinaiticus site has, for many years, perpetrated a blatant fraud against the public with the Henry Tompkins Anderson NT text, with the CSP (Codex Sinaiticus Project, from the British Library) website claim that it is an English translation. This has been exposed on the textualcrticism forums, after I discovered it and posted on the old FFF forum.

Here is a sample.

[TC-Alternate-list] Codex Sinaiticus Project - oops .. English translation is not Sinaiticus.
March 5, 2010
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/TC-Alternate-list/conversations/topics/3080

Sinaiticus web-site

Luke 4:4
And he preached in the synagogues of Galilee.

John 1:18
No one has seen God at any time;
the only begotten Son,
who is in the bosom of the Father,
he has made him known.

Matthew 27:49
But the rest said:
Wait, let us see if Elijah is coming to save him.
omitted
but another, having taken a spear. pierced his side and blood and water came out

Mark 6:22
and the daughter of the same Herodias having come in and danced, she pleased Herod and those that reclined with him at table; and the king said to the maiden: Ask of me whatever thou wilt, and I will give thee.

Luke 1:26
And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,

Mark 4:21
And he said to them: Is a lamp brought that it may be put under the measure or under the bed?
Is it not brought that it may be put on the lampstand?

Sometimes it is simply the KJB, through Anderson, even where the Sinaiticus varies (does not have "shall melt").

2 Peter 3:10
But the day of the Lord will come as a thief,
in which the heavens
shall pass away with a great noise,
and the elements shall melt with fervent heat,
and the earth and the works that are in it shall be burned up.

Dozens, or 100s, more examples can be given.

The Project has been notified in the past week or two, they say they originally had the Anderson reference and it was dropped accidentally .. and will look at the concern about the English text not being accurate to the Codex.
James Snapp is one of the few who have had integrity on this issue, and who joined in asking for the deceiving of the public to end, e.g.:

[textualcriticism] The Online Non-Translation of Sinaiticus
Jame Snapp - July 1, 2010
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/textualcriticism/message/5879

When asked to help, due to his contacts in those circles, Daniel Wallace did not care one whit that the public was deceived, as you see here:


[textualcriticism] CSNTM's - request assistance on Codex Sinaiticus Project misinformation
Daniel Wallace - May, 2010
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/textualcriticism/conversations/topics/5717

A few months back, after continuing brush-offs and ignoring requests, the CSP folks finally wrote me (partly because we had productive correspondence on other issues) that they were placing in a disclaimer, the Leipzig computer group was working on it. I should check to see if it was done. Up to the time of that letter, their credibility on the matter has been below zilch.

Ok, here is what they did .. pro forma, not on the "English translation" page, and not clearly saying that the translation is not. So most will continue to be deceived:


"The Codex Sinaiticus Project was primarily a conservation, digitisation, transcription and publication project. It did not undertake a new English translation of the New Testament from the manuscript. The English translation included in the Codex Sinaiticus website was taken from H. T. Anderson, The New Testament: translated from the Sinaitic manuscript discovered by Constantine Tischendorf at Mt Sinai (Cincinnati, 1918). It was included only to provide a navigational aid to users of the website."
http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/sacredtexts/codexsinai.html
An improvement, however the CSP visitor is never told that this text is not actually translated from the Sinaitic manuscript.

Generally I would not use the Anderson English as a reference for anything, it is just used for the charlatan claim that has lasted for years on the CSP site. Incidentally, Anderson himself was not the root cause of the problem. There was a reissue of his work in 1918 that made incorrect claims (see the title above), and those were apparently used by the CSP whiz-kids.


===============================

Most users of the bogus English translation will not notice the modest disclaimer, which the CSP placed on the site after years of total denial.

 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
summary of the English translation deception

A summary:

In 1864 and 1866 Henry Tompkins Anderson, buffeted by metaphyisical (occult or demonic, masking as Christian) forces, comes out with yet another nothing English version.

Before he passes in 1872, Anderson has some notes or changes or the beginnings of a new edition, using the ultra-corrupt Sinaiticus as an additional source.

In 1918 his son-in-law publishes the new updated edition, without making it clear exactly what Anderson had left. He gives it the bogus title as being from the "Sinaitic manuscript", perhaps in ignorance.

In 2004 this 1918 edition is again published with the bogus claim of being from the Sinaitic manusucript by Jackson Snyder II.

In 2009 the British Library supports the CSP project. Some brainiac thinks they should have an English translation, but since there is no such thing published, and any actual translation would be far too mangled and expose the corruptness of the manuscript, they use the smoothed-over, warmed-over junque hybrid version of Tompkins, 1918. As far as we know, not one of their scholars (e.g. David Parker) cares that the public is deceived.

When the CSP is asked to correct this deception, they stonewall, even making the fabricated claims that they had accidentally removed the acknowledgement of the source. This goes on for years, in the textual community Daniel Wallace is particularly noticeable for not being interested in the integrity issue. Eventually, after they have received many inquiries and complaints the programmers in Leipzig put on a pseudo-disclaimer -- one that is not on the "translation" page and that will be missed by most users of the Sinaiticus website.

So the deception continues.

Steven Avery

 
Top